Wasting the last few years of Tom's career AND the window to win the SB.

This is now a situation where the Pats start thinking about how much they could get for Brady in a trade ala Drew Bledsoe. Blow it up, start from scratch, and see what that 3rd round QB with 1st round talent (haven't we heard something similar recently-low draft high talent) can do.

Wasting the last few years of Tom's career AND the window to win the SB.

This is now a situation where the Pats start thinking about how much they could get for Brady in a trade ala Drew Bledsoe. Blow it up, start from scratch, and see what that 3rd round QB with 1st round talent (haven't we heard something similar recently-low draft high talent) can do.

100% incorrect. Brady is healthy and still awesome. There isn't any need to trade him.

It's too bad that these things have happened to the passing targets. Maybe Amoleba (or whatever) will prove to be a decent replacement for Welker. Hey, it's possible.

The TE situation is, sad to say, good news. Those contracts were insane in price and length. Gronk will end up getting cut for being too injury prone and obviously Hernandez is done in this town.

The only thing the Pats did for Tom Brady this offseason is too sign injury prone Danny A. in favor of the hardest working most dependable slot WR in the game. They did nothing to give Brady a legit deep threat. Now that Hernandez is headed to the can, Brady goes into this season with Donald Jones, Mike Jenkins, and Danny A. as his top WR threats!

The Pats need a real GM!!!!!

How about they may have fixed the D. That's what Tom Brady needed most a legit pass rush and reasonable pass coverage. They gave Brady a good running game, a couple more linemen and there's depth in the TE position. Thank goodness.

The colts used to give manning everything on O and a crappy D. They won one and lost one. Us being the colts the last few years we lost 2. That mentality doesn't work IMO

I am not trying to stir the pot. I am, however, considering how dispassionately the pats look at players when it comes to value, contracts, and situations. It is my opinion that Brady has not done a great job developing receivers. There have been plenty that have come through the pats system that haven't become effective for the pats. Now, I'll mostly blame the receivers for this, but I do believe that once Brady finds valuable targets and synergy with those targets, he forgets the others - at least that seems to be the case for the last half dozen years.

As of today - there isn't a single one of those targets that is anticipated to start the season. No Gronkowski, no Hernandez, no Welker, no Branch. Further - another one year project, Lloyd is also gone.

When Brady was more game manager and not the focal point (when the pats were winning superbowls) they had a very effective running game and a legendary defense that never let an opponent's offense take over a game. Do they have either or those now?

If the answer is no, then the focus remains on the great Brady with tools with whom he has no long term relationship or synergy.

So again, given the way the pats dispassionately evaluate players, values, and situations, a Brady move is worth consideration. Brady just restructured his contract in a way that nearly any team in the NFL would give away the house for.

Here's an alternate title for this thread: "What I would have done if I were GM: A Revisionist history based purely on hindsight." By Don'tQuestionBB, a troll in fan's clothing, ably supported by the handwringers and told-you-sos.

Nobody was complaining when they signed Gronk and Hdz to those contracts. The coverage was overwhelmingly favorable. I recall terms like "win-win" and "forward thinking" and "ahead of the curve" being used.

Now, we know you're all football geniuses and have forgotten more about running a team than BB will ever know, but where were you back then? Just wondering.

Yeah, lets trade Brady and cash the season in to get Johnny football like the colts did when they got luck.

Not. Brady represents our best chance of winning. This team is still, even without Hernandez, right in the thick of it to possibly win the AFC. Why cash a season in if you have a chance?

Gronk will come back and be good for us around week 6-7. The offense goes through him..not AH. Gronk to me is more valuable than welker Ever was. Look at our stats in both the pass and run game when he is on the field vs not. Get Gronk healthy, Dobson or Boyce or both breakthrough, Danny stays healthy and we get something from Edelman, etc and it will be enough.

No reason to blow this party up just yet. We got some football to win. Challenging? Yes. But nothing the pats can't handle.

I am not trying to stir the pot. I am, however, considering how dispassionately the pats look at players when it comes to value, contracts, and situations. It is my opinion that Brady has not done a great job developing receivers. There have been plenty that have come through the pats system that haven't become effective for the pats. Now, I'll mostly blame the receivers for this, but I do believe that once Brady finds valuable targets and synergy with those targets, he forgets the others - at least that seems to be the case for the last half dozen years.

As of today - there isn't a single one of those targets that is anticipated to start the season. No Gronkowski, no Hernandez, no Welker, no Branch. Further - another one year project, Lloyd is also gone.

When Brady was more game manager and not the focal point (when the pats were winning superbowls) they had a very effective running game and a legendary defense that never let an opponent's offense take over a game. Do they have either or those now?

If the answer is no, then the focus remains on the great Brady with tools with whom he has no long term relationship or synergy.

So again, given the way the pats dispassionately evaluate players, values, and situations, a Brady move is worth consideration. Brady just restructured his contract in a way that nearly any team in the NFL would give away the house for.

Okay, what Pat's recievers that TB didn't "develop" went to other teams and were "developed" by those teams and their QB's.

Perhaps the recievers they gave him to "develop" weren't capable of being "developed"?

i think the real issue is continuity. You can't continue to reshuffle the deck at WR or TE and expect great things. I am not saying the pats haven't missed on wr's, but there is plenty of evidence they have found talent to work within their system. You could question the system if anything, if it maximizes a players potential athletically. Perhaps it is too heady. I don't know.

Here's an alternate title for this thread: "What I would have done if I were GM: A Revisionist history based purely on hindsight." By Don'tQuestionBB, a troll in fan's clothing, ably supported by the handwringers and told-you-sos.

Nobody was complaining when they signed Gronk and Hdz to those contracts. The coverage was overwhelmingly favorable. I recall terms like "win-win" and "forward thinking" and "ahead of the curve" being used.

Now, we know you're all football geniuses and have forgotten more about running a team than BB will ever know, but where were you back then? Just wondering.

I'm not faulting the patriots decisions, except maybe for Welker, if only because they knew they had injury issues to be resolved with Gronkowski. They could not have foreseen the Hernandez issue, obviously. I am only considering their current situation. And I am not saying I am right, I am just providing discussion fodder.

If my remarks are, in your opinion, incorrect then challenge that.

Do the pats not dispassionately view players situations and contracts? Is this situation now completely in flux? I heard this week on NFL radio that the pats may now have to "accelerate" Gronkowski's rehab. Do they really want to do this? But do they not have another choice? Apparently, Ballard is not yet ready.

Yeah, lets trade Brady and cash the season in to get Johnny football like the colts did when they got luck.

Not. Brady represents our best chance of winning. This team is still, even without Hernandez, right in the thick of it to possibly win the AFC. Why cash a season in if you have a chance?

Gronk will come back and be good for us around week 6-7. The offense goes through him..not AH. Gronk to me is more valuable than welker Ever was. Look at our stats in both the pass and run game when he is on the field vs not. Get Gronk healthy, Dobson or Boyce or both breakthrough, Danny stays healthy and we get something from Edelman, etc and it will be enough.

No reason to blow this party up just yet. We got some football to win. Challenging? Yes. But nothing the pats can't handle.

I am not trying to stir the pot. I am, however, considering how dispassionately the pats look at players when it comes to value, contracts, and situations. It is my opinion that Brady has not done a great job developing receivers. There have been plenty that have come through the pats system that haven't become effective for the pats. Now, I'll mostly blame the receivers for this, but I do believe that once Brady finds valuable targets and synergy with those targets, he forgets the others - at least that seems to be the case for the last half dozen years.

As of today - there isn't a single one of those targets that is anticipated to start the season. No Gronkowski, no Hernandez, no Welker, no Branch. Further - another one year project, Lloyd is also gone.

When Brady was more game manager and not the focal point (when the pats were winning superbowls) they had a very effective running game and a legendary defense that never let an opponent's offense take over a game. Do they have either or those now?

If the answer is no, then the focus remains on the great Brady with tools with whom he has no long term relationship or synergy.

So again, given the way the pats dispassionately evaluate players, values, and situations, a Brady move is worth consideration. Brady just restructured his contract in a way that nearly any team in the NFL would give away the house for.

Okay, what Pat's recievers that TB didn't "develop" went to other teams and were "developed" by those teams and their QB's.

Perhaps the recievers they gave him to "develop" weren't capable of being "developed"?

As I noted, I put most of the issue on the receivers that didn't develop, but I do believe Brady locks in to those that work and that inhibits the progress of others. I accept that I could be wrong, but I stand by my opinion. Further, receivers that are relegated to teams with significantly lesser QB's will never get that development. Look how effective Larry Fitzgerald was this year. Brady has the capability to take receivers to a higher level where most other QB's do not. I am not sure he has.

Here's an alternate title for this thread: "What I would have done if I were GM: A Revisionist history based purely on hindsight." By Don'tQuestionBB, a troll in fan's clothing, ably supported by the handwringers and told-you-sos.

Nobody was complaining when they signed Gronk and Hdz to those contracts. The coverage was overwhelmingly favorable. I recall terms like "win-win" and "forward thinking" and "ahead of the curve" being used.

Now, we know you're all football geniuses and have forgotten more about running a team than BB will ever know, but where were you back then? Just wondering.

I understood the signing of Gronk - it had to be done - but the extending of Hernandez baffled me a little bit. I knew he was a good player, but he had some injury problems and wasn't the complete player Gronk was, plus I just thought that was an awful lot of money to have tied up into one position. Hernandez's contract had time left on it...they ended up giving him more money than Gronk got. We put 90 million into the position...will this kill the team and our salary cap? The NFL salary cap is the most fluid thing in sports, but losing Gronk, Hernandez, Welker, and Lloyd will hurt us.

I imagine the team's hopes will lie on two of the most injury prone players in the NFL (Amendola and Edelman). I think we added some talent to the outside flanker spots, but that will take time. Hopefully Gronk will come back at some point and help, but that is far from a certainty. Either Brady will have to have the best season of his career, or the defense will have to finally improve for us to win.

i think the real issue is continuity. You can't continue to reshuffle the deck at WR or TE and expect great things. I am not saying the pats haven't missed on wr's, but there is plenty of evidence they have found talent to work within their system. You could question the system if anything, if it maximizes a players potential athletically. Perhaps it is too heady. I don't know.

Brown was a vet. branch, patton, and givens, maybe, except they played when Brady was more game manager than star and as Brady was becoming a star, as you said, they let those guys go. Since then what? Welker had shown significant promise already in Miami.

Gronk and Hernandez, I agree with you on, but they also possessed unique size and skill for their position.

I am not trying to stir the pot. I am, however, considering how dispassionately the pats look at players when it comes to value, contracts, and situations. It is my opinion that Brady has not done a great job developing receivers. There have been plenty that have come through the pats system that haven't become effective for the pats. Now, I'll mostly blame the receivers for this, but I do believe that once Brady finds valuable targets and synergy with those targets, he forgets the others - at least that seems to be the case for the last half dozen years.

As of today - there isn't a single one of those targets that is anticipated to start the season. No Gronkowski, no Hernandez, no Welker, no Branch. Further - another one year project, Lloyd is also gone.

When Brady was more game manager and not the focal point (when the pats were winning superbowls) they had a very effective running game and a legendary defense that never let an opponent's offense take over a game. Do they have either or those now?

If the answer is no, then the focus remains on the great Brady with tools with whom he has no long term relationship or synergy.

So again, given the way the pats dispassionately evaluate players, values, and situations, a Brady move is worth consideration. Brady just restructured his contract in a way that nearly any team in the NFL would give away the house for.

Okay, what Pat's recievers that TB didn't "develop" went to other teams and were "developed" by those teams and their QB's.

Perhaps the recievers they gave him to "develop" weren't capable of being "developed"?

As I noted, I put most of the issue on the receivers that didn't develop, but I do believe Brady locks in to those that work and that inhibits the progress of others. I accept that I could be wrong, but I stand by my opinion. Further, receivers that are relegated to teams with significantly lesser QB's will never get that development. Look how effective Larry Fitzgerald was this year. Brady has the capability to take receivers to a higher level where most other QB's do not. I am not sure he has.

All I asked for was the recievers that he failed to "develop" that were successful elsewhere. That would prove your theory.

So are you saying that if Brady had a comprable reciever like Larry Fitzgerald... let's say like Randy Moss that Brady would be unable to to take him to a higher level?

Wasting the last few years of Tom's career AND the window to win the SB.

This is now a situation where the Pats start thinking about how much they could get for Brady in a trade ala Drew Bledsoe. Blow it up, start from scratch, and see what that 3rd round QB with 1st round talent (haven't we heard something similar recently-low draft high talent) can do.

A truly dumb post. Yeah we should blow up a 12-4 team that went to the AFC title gm.

I am not trying to stir the pot. I am, however, considering how dispassionately the pats look at players when it comes to value, contracts, and situations. It is my opinion that Brady has not done a great job developing receivers. There have been plenty that have come through the pats system that haven't become effective for the pats. Now, I'll mostly blame the receivers for this, but I do believe that once Brady finds valuable targets and synergy with those targets, he forgets the others - at least that seems to be the case for the last half dozen years.

As of today - there isn't a single one of those targets that is anticipated to start the season. No Gronkowski, no Hernandez, no Welker, no Branch. Further - another one year project, Lloyd is also gone.

When Brady was more game manager and not the focal point (when the pats were winning superbowls) they had a very effective running game and a legendary defense that never let an opponent's offense take over a game. Do they have either or those now?

If the answer is no, then the focus remains on the great Brady with tools with whom he has no long term relationship or synergy.

So again, given the way the pats dispassionately evaluate players, values, and situations, a Brady move is worth consideration. Brady just restructured his contract in a way that nearly any team in the NFL would give away the house for.

Okay, what Pat's recievers that TB didn't "develop" went to other teams and were "developed" by those teams and their QB's.

Perhaps the recievers they gave him to "develop" weren't capable of being "developed"?

As I noted, I put most of the issue on the receivers that didn't develop, but I do believe Brady locks in to those that work and that inhibits the progress of others. I accept that I could be wrong, but I stand by my opinion. Further, receivers that are relegated to teams with significantly lesser QB's will never get that development. Look how effective Larry Fitzgerald was this year. Brady has the capability to take receivers to a higher level where most other QB's do not. I am not sure he has.

All I asked for was the recievers that he failed to "develop" that were successful elsewhere. That would prove your theory.

So are you saying that if Brady had a comprable reciever like Larry Fitzgerald... let's say like Randy Moss that Brady would be unable to to take him to a higher level?

I disagree with your assumption based on your sole criteria, and I did say that I put most on the receivers for their own lack of development, but as I noted there are also other factors involved such as to what teams they went and who their QB's were and whether or not the team was stable. If you wish to place this issue on the team making drafting mistakes, there's that too, but somehow Brady's got to bear some responsibility for not being able to find value in these players.

And no about Fitzgerald, the comment was in support of my point that when good receivers are put in poor situations then they can't/won't produce. They can't throw the ball to themselves. Where ineffective QB's diminish a WR's talent, a great QB like Brady can allow it to flourish, AND he can turn marginal receivers into effective ones. But if a guy like Brady has already established who his targets will be, the rest of the receiving group is left to fail.

I am not trying to stir the pot. I am, however, considering how dispassionately the pats look at players when it comes to value, contracts, and situations. It is my opinion that Brady has not done a great job developing receivers. There have been plenty that have come through the pats system that haven't become effective for the pats. Now, I'll mostly blame the receivers for this, but I do believe that once Brady finds valuable targets and synergy with those targets, he forgets the others - at least that seems to be the case for the last half dozen years.

As of today - there isn't a single one of those targets that is anticipated to start the season. No Gronkowski, no Hernandez, no Welker, no Branch. Further - another one year project, Lloyd is also gone.

When Brady was more game manager and not the focal point (when the pats were winning superbowls) they had a very effective running game and a legendary defense that never let an opponent's offense take over a game. Do they have either or those now?

If the answer is no, then the focus remains on the great Brady with tools with whom he has no long term relationship or synergy.

So again, given the way the pats dispassionately evaluate players, values, and situations, a Brady move is worth consideration. Brady just restructured his contract in a way that nearly any team in the NFL would give away the house for.

Okay, what Pat's recievers that TB didn't "develop" went to other teams and were "developed" by those teams and their QB's.

Perhaps the recievers they gave him to "develop" weren't capable of being "developed"?

This is my take. When the Pats get a new good receiver (Hern, Gronk), Brady gets him involved right away. The problem is that most of the receivers we've brought in were just bad. It's a player acquisition problem, not a player development problem.

I am not trying to stir the pot. I am, however, considering how dispassionately the pats look at players when it comes to value, contracts, and situations. It is my opinion that Brady has not done a great job developing receivers. There have been plenty that have come through the pats system that haven't become effective for the pats. Now, I'll mostly blame the receivers for this, but I do believe that once Brady finds valuable targets and synergy with those targets, he forgets the others - at least that seems to be the case for the last half dozen years.

As of today - there isn't a single one of those targets that is anticipated to start the season. No Gronkowski, no Hernandez, no Welker, no Branch. Further - another one year project, Lloyd is also gone.

When Brady was more game manager and not the focal point (when the pats were winning superbowls) they had a very effective running game and a legendary defense that never let an opponent's offense take over a game. Do they have either or those now?

If the answer is no, then the focus remains on the great Brady with tools with whom he has no long term relationship or synergy.

So again, given the way the pats dispassionately evaluate players, values, and situations, a Brady move is worth consideration. Brady just restructured his contract in a way that nearly any team in the NFL would give away the house for.

Okay, what Pat's recievers that TB didn't "develop" went to other teams and were "developed" by those teams and their QB's.

Perhaps the recievers they gave him to "develop" weren't capable of being "developed"?

As I noted, I put most of the issue on the receivers that didn't develop, but I do believe Brady locks in to those that work and that inhibits the progress of others. I accept that I could be wrong, but I stand by my opinion. Further, receivers that are relegated to teams with significantly lesser QB's will never get that development. Look how effective Larry Fitzgerald was this year. Brady has the capability to take receivers to a higher level where most other QB's do not. I am not sure he has.

who are the receivers he's failed to develop? please list names. Edelman? Ocho? Underwood? Who are all these high potential receivers Brady is ignoring?

I am not trying to stir the pot. I am, however, considering how dispassionately the pats look at players when it comes to value, contracts, and situations. It is my opinion that Brady has not done a great job developing receivers. There have been plenty that have come through the pats system that haven't become effective for the pats. Now, I'll mostly blame the receivers for this, but I do believe that once Brady finds valuable targets and synergy with those targets, he forgets the others - at least that seems to be the case for the last half dozen years.

As of today - there isn't a single one of those targets that is anticipated to start the season. No Gronkowski, no Hernandez, no Welker, no Branch. Further - another one year project, Lloyd is also gone.

When Brady was more game manager and not the focal point (when the pats were winning superbowls) they had a very effective running game and a legendary defense that never let an opponent's offense take over a game. Do they have either or those now?

If the answer is no, then the focus remains on the great Brady with tools with whom he has no long term relationship or synergy.

So again, given the way the pats dispassionately evaluate players, values, and situations, a Brady move is worth consideration. Brady just restructured his contract in a way that nearly any team in the NFL would give away the house for.

Okay, what Pat's recievers that TB didn't "develop" went to other teams and were "developed" by those teams and their QB's.

Perhaps the recievers they gave him to "develop" weren't capable of being "developed"?

As I noted, I put most of the issue on the receivers that didn't develop, but I do believe Brady locks in to those that work and that inhibits the progress of others. I accept that I could be wrong, but I stand by my opinion. Further, receivers that are relegated to teams with significantly lesser QB's will never get that development. Look how effective Larry Fitzgerald was this year. Brady has the capability to take receivers to a higher level where most other QB's do not. I am not sure he has.

All I asked for was the recievers that he failed to "develop" that were successful elsewhere. That would prove your theory.

So are you saying that if Brady had a comprable reciever like Larry Fitzgerald... let's say like Randy Moss that Brady would be unable to to take him to a higher level?

I disagree with your assumption based on your sole criteria, and I did say that I put most on the receivers for their own lack of development, but as I noted there are also other factors involved such as to what teams they went and who their QB's were and whether or not the team was stable. If you wish to place this issue on the team making drafting mistakes, there's that too, but somehow Brady's got to bear some responsibility for not being able to find value in these players.

And no about Fitzgerald, the comment was in support of my point that when good receivers are put in poor situations then they can't/won't produce. They can't throw the ball to themselves. Where ineffective QB's diminish a WR's talent, a great QB like Brady can allow it to flourish, AND he can turn marginal receivers into effective ones. But if a guy like Brady has already established who his targets will be, the rest of the receiving group is left to fail.

Please, again, provide the names of the ignored receivers. Yes, Brady throws to the same guys over and over. But the main reason for that is because those same guys are the only guys on the field!

I am not trying to stir the pot. I am, however, considering how dispassionately the pats look at players when it comes to value, contracts, and situations. It is my opinion that Brady has not done a great job developing receivers. There have been plenty that have come through the pats system that haven't become effective for the pats. Now, I'll mostly blame the receivers for this, but I do believe that once Brady finds valuable targets and synergy with those targets, he forgets the others - at least that seems to be the case for the last half dozen years.

As of today - there isn't a single one of those targets that is anticipated to start the season. No Gronkowski, no Hernandez, no Welker, no Branch. Further - another one year project, Lloyd is also gone.

When Brady was more game manager and not the focal point (when the pats were winning superbowls) they had a very effective running game and a legendary defense that never let an opponent's offense take over a game. Do they have either or those now?

If the answer is no, then the focus remains on the great Brady with tools with whom he has no long term relationship or synergy.

So again, given the way the pats dispassionately evaluate players, values, and situations, a Brady move is worth consideration. Brady just restructured his contract in a way that nearly any team in the NFL would give away the house for.

Okay, what Pat's recievers that TB didn't "develop" went to other teams and were "developed" by those teams and their QB's.

Perhaps the recievers they gave him to "develop" weren't capable of being "developed"?

As I noted, I put most of the issue on the receivers that didn't develop, but I do believe Brady locks in to those that work and that inhibits the progress of others. I accept that I could be wrong, but I stand by my opinion. Further, receivers that are relegated to teams with significantly lesser QB's will never get that development. Look how effective Larry Fitzgerald was this year. Brady has the capability to take receivers to a higher level where most other QB's do not. I am not sure he has.

All I asked for was the recievers that he failed to "develop" that were successful elsewhere. That would prove your theory.

So are you saying that if Brady had a comprable reciever like Larry Fitzgerald... let's say like Randy Moss that Brady would be unable to to take him to a higher level?

I disagree with your assumption based on your sole criteria, and I did say that I put most on the receivers for their own lack of development, but as I noted there are also other factors involved such as to what teams they went and who their QB's were and whether or not the team was stable. If you wish to place this issue on the team making drafting mistakes, there's that too, but somehow Brady's got to bear some responsibility for not being able to find value in these players.

And no about Fitzgerald, the comment was in support of my point that when good receivers are put in poor situations then they can't/won't produce. They can't throw the ball to themselves. Where ineffective QB's diminish a WR's talent, a great QB like Brady can allow it to flourish, AND he can turn marginal receivers into effective ones. But if a guy like Brady has already established who his targets will be, the rest of the receiving group is left to fail.

We are going to agree to disagree. My sole criteria was in response to your allegation that "brady has not done a great job developing recievers.

I asked for some examples of recievers he failed to "develop" that went to other teams and were "developed". This would give credence to your assertion. So your premise is just an opinion without any facts or anecdotal evidence to support it.

What is funny is somehow Brady got Brandon LLoyd 70 + catches and lloyd is not even on an NFL 90 man roster. Seems to me he does what he can with what they give him.

Rusty makes the same argument that UD6 makes. The only player Rusty ever mentions is Ocho. But please, does anyone think that's a good example anymore after Ocho's performance in Miami? And Jri is right that Lloyd is a perfect example of how Brady does get new receivers involved if they have any ability at all.

Rusty makes the same argument that UD6 makes. The only player Rusty ever mentions is Ocho. But please, does anyone think that's a good example anymore after Ocho's performance in Miami? And Jri is right that Lloyd is a perfect example of how Brady does get new receivers involved if they have any ability at all.